this is actually about two things related to the new document Avoiding Common Failures in Symbian Signed tests:
- One is kind of a meta-feedback on how the feedback itself on documents is handled - I posted the attached feeback about two weeks ago based on the version made available to FN PRO members, by using the "Evaluate this resource" link at the back of the docment - does anyone actually read those? I find that especially the last point I raised is one that had to be fixed before publication of the document, but no change was made. Does it make any sense to fill in those reports?
- Luckily I saved a copy of my feedback because I did not trust the web form on forum.nokia.com - it wouldn't be the first time that a carefully written documents just disappears into "Server Error" nirvana... So here goes again:
- Section 2.2: Too vague, especially on colour schemes - please show an example of a screen that would be universally accepted as being of such "bad taste" so that it is going to be considered a fatal failure because of the colors chosen.
- Section 2.6: Privacy statement - I believe this should clarify the relationship to section 2.8, especially for the case of using services only for the purpose of registration: is it ok to omit a privacy statement in favour of one-shot warnings for the specific case of SMS/Internet registration? [In my personal option, I would say "yes", because this is clearer for the user since it is related to current activity.]
- Section 2.9: Removing files on uninstall - this must reference the important FNTL article about KIS000186
which points out that the recommended solution of using FN actually does not always work! I believe a similar issue exists with 3rd Edition, where FN is deprecated, and also not functional. This should be made explict rather than pointing out only the alternative of using the private directory "as if there was a choice". ;-)